Main menu

Post navigation

Tell Me Why Are We About To Attack Iran?

Here’s a story we should be hearing about in the Corporate-Controlled Media, but aren’t:

The mainstream media has failed to report the agreement reached between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Iranian government in regards to the Iranian nuclear energy program. An understanding has been reached between the two. The IAEA has given Iran’s nuclear program a clean bill of health.

Why is the U.S. media not reporting on this matter? Why do the U.S. and its Western allies continue to threaten Iran with punitive bombings for its alleged non-compliance, when everything indicates that Iran has a bona fide nuclear energy program and does not have the capabilities of developing nuclear weapons?

Share this:

Like this:

Related

About Wayne A. Schneider

I'm a Liberal, Libertarian, Atheist Humanist. I believe that though the world is a dangerous place, it can be made better if we stop dividing ourselves by how we're different from each other, and reach out to each other through what we have in common. And that is that we are all human beings on this planet. Please remember that.

Maybe Bill O’Reilly and his viewers can claim that excuse, but the rest of the country can’t. Perhaps we need to write to the various TV and cable networks and demand that they start covering this unreported story. It has a direct bearing on the veracity of the president’s claims. So what if any reporter who dares to ask will get his or her WH press credentials pulled?

And here’s another link from global researcher about a Faux Snooze article from yesterday..http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6758
Relavant excerpts:
“A recent decision by German officials to withhold support for any new sanctions against Iran has pushed a broad spectrum of officials in Washington to develop potential scenarios for a military attack on the Islamic regime,” Fox reported on Tuesday.

Lt. Gen. (ret.) Thomas McInerney told Fox…(among other inflammatory bullshit)…”The one I favor the most, of course, is an air campaign,” he continued. “Forty-eight hours duration, hitting 2500 aimed points to take out their nuclear facilities, their air defense facilities, their air force, their navy, their Shahab-3 retaliatory missiles, and finally their command and control. And then let the Iranian people take their country back.”

Thanks, Walt, I’ll look into that. Although I am not completely up-to-date on the issue, I understand that Iran wants to start selling its oil in Euros. But I also thought that we didn’t buy any oil from them (true?) If so, wouldn’t it be better that Iran didn’t get so many American dollars in its coffers? Wouldn’t that provide a better chance for those dollars to end up back in our pockets? (I admit that I do not understand world finances as well as I should.)

In that case, if Fox Nuts knows that Iran has been cooperating with the IAEA, then why do they still help the Bush administration beat the drums for war with Iran? Are they supposed to be an objective news source, or an unacknowledged arm of the Republican Party?

I think it has something to do with the devaluing of the dollar as a result of switching from dollars to Euros. I have read a couple of really good articles online about this recently.
We bombed Iraq once Saddam switched from dollars to Euros. After we took out Saddam, it was quietly switched back to dollars (I just found that little tidbit in the last month somewhere).

I also thought the point of bombing Iran wasn’t to GET their oil, but to disrupt the flow of oil so they could set the price and make a ‘killing’ in the markets.
Whoever controls the oil (and gas) controls the world. If they disrupt the flow, then they can set the price. EVERYONE depends on those energy resources to keep moving, running their machines, manufacturing absolutely everything, etc..etc..etc.. People will pay what they have to to get it (oil).
Everywhere in the world where there are conflicts going on, I will bet you will find oil or gas pipelines nearby. That includes in Africa and North Pole.

But I also thought that we didn’t buy any oil from them (true?) If so, wouldn’t it be better that Iran didn’t get so many American dollars in its coffers? Wouldn’t that provide a better chance for those dollars to end up back in our pockets? (I admit that I do not understand world finances as well as I should.)

Right now, all oil transactions worldwide are made in dollars, which helps prop up the value of the dollar. If Iran starts trading oil in Euros or Yen, the dollar becomes less valuable, because there’s less demand for dollars in Japan or the EU.

I believe that’s how it works. Hopefully someone with a better grasp on currency exchange and international commodities markets can explain it better.

Toasterhead, what is the deal with Venezuela? I know that is one of the reason we have been demonizing them so much.

I know for a fact from reading a number of articles that Iran has been in the process of switching to Euros. That is why they are pushing so hard to move this thing forward (bombing). It could destroy the dollar.

Now, if the dollar were to collapse as the result of a Euro-traded oil bourse, would that cause the kind of stock market crash that would make the S&P drop to 700 points? This could be one explanation for the huge “bin Laden trade.”

“Recently Brazil moved ahead and formed a business alliance with Venezuela. China and Russia also formed alliance with Venezuela. In spite of Washington’s opposition, Russia plans to provide defense hardware to Venezuela…”

Like many countries, the reason we demonise them is because someone takes power and “nationalizes” the oil resources.

“OVERTHROW OF PREMIER MOSSADEQ OF IRAN, November 1952-August 1953” . specifically, BP got thrown out, and so the CIA jumped into action. and “The Shaw” ran his dictatorship till he was overthrown…

this is from the Bloomburg Report…

“Jan. 8 (Bloomberg) — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he would nationalize utilities, including the country’s biggest phone company, and the energy ministry threatened the same for oil-production joint ventures.”